From Mark Kolmar Sent Sat, Apr 11th 1998, 23:31
On Fri, 10 Apr 1998, KaisrSolze wrote: > outlook, but programmed jazz isn't jazz at all. The way I see it, > jazz=improvisation. Sometimes this improv is within a strict form > (bebop, etc.), sometimes it's "free jazz." But programming jazz strips > it of its essential nature. I agree that the magic which jazz can create comes out of a sort of musical conversation between the players. My main complaint about IDM and D'n'B which invokes the flavor of jazz has been that it comes out flat and bland to my taste. Playing to a programmed backing, there is no give-and- take -- the programmed parts don't adjust themselves based on what they hear you play. Compare Miles Davis' _In a Silent Way_ to much of the jazz-ish, cafe music of the last several years, and that should illustrate the point. > Is any computer program as flexible and nuanced as > a physical instrument, dynamically and otherwise? Maybe in a few years > electronic musicians will be able to instantly call up exactly the sound > they want, but I don't see that capability existing now. I think the problem is partly that so much of the gear, and the thinking behind it, comes from an attempt to find a cheap way to simulate acoustic instruments. (And for that matter, natural spaces.) But that misses the point: electronic musicians can be open to "happy accidents" (even when every event is programmed), much as a jazz quintet won't be sure exactly what will happen next, only that it will fall within certain boundaries. --Mark __ <http://www.xnet.com/~mkolmar/BurningRome> < MPEG & RA audio clips > Forthcoming CD SENSELESS on Mindfield Records MINDCD03 Cathartium 14 m u s i c : w e b : s o u n d d e s i g n : h t m l : c g i : e t c "I'm a liberal guy too cool for the macho ache with a secret tooth for the cherry on the cake" -- Prefab Sprout, "Cruel"